Bush pushes high-speed Internet access by 2007

USA Today ^ | March 26, 2004 | USAToday.com staff

[BigSkyFreeper]

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (Reuters)

[Ronaldus Magnus]

Great news. This wise investment in our nation's infrastructure will pay for itself many times over in increased economic productivity as well as bolstering our international competitiveness. Anyone who resents this small but necessary role of government can do us all a favor and go live in a house boat in the South China Sea without any the interferance from any government.

[BigSkyFreeper]

That's not a reason, that's an excuse that I find inexcusable.

[HAL9000]

"We ought to have universal, affordable access to broadband technology by the year 2007," Bush said in a speech in Albuquerque, New Mexico. "And then we ought to make sure that as soon as possible thereafter consumers have plenty of choices..."

I wish he'd said this four years ago so that the economy would be in better shape today, but better late than never.

If the government must get involved to keep the U.S. #1 in communications technology, then so be it.

[Steve Eisenberg]

I was going to say just that n there would be no internet but for "government interference."

I have no problem with a modest level of government support for networking research. However, the more I think about this no-government no-internet claim, the less I believe it. There was and is tremendous incentive to find every possible way to commercialize networking. The internet is one such way, and it would have been invented. Note that the Internet was around 25 years before the invention of the banner ad. This tells me that government involvement did not necessarily speed anything up. Well, it speeded up a little, but lower taxes due to smaller government would also have speeded it up a little.

[BykrBayb]

No, we don't. You failed to mention the only choice I have, which is dial up. No other Internet access is available here.

[xrp]

Too bad sucker!

[xrp]

If you're willing to pay enough, someone will provide Internet access for you. Contact a telecom about getting a T1 line.

[BigSkyFreeper]

Whatever, Punk.

[BigSkyFreeper]

Whatever, Punk.

[cornelis]

My guess is that ensuring such access is cheaper than roads.

You gotta also remember that large telecom companies that most resemble monopolies are equal players with "government" entities. Their actions can be as interfering and restrictive as any government. When DoJ and Microsoft go to court, they're just players of a different in color playing on the same boardgame.

[BigSkyFreeper]

Would you pay $4500 a month for a T1 line access?

[BykrBayb]

I did. I don't remember how many hundreds of dollars the quote was, but it was out of the question.

[Az Joe]

Bush wants to keep broadband tax free.

[xrp]

k

[Petronski]

Why not satellite broadband?

[Revolting cat!]

We're lagging in broadband access and affordability behind great industrial powers like, uhm, Finland, North Korea... eh, no need to go on and upset oneself! Repeat after meas loud as you can: U-S-A IS NUMBER ONE! U-S-A IS NUMBER ONE!

[xrp]

No. You?

[xrp]

Too bad.

[xrp]

Me too. You?

[BigSkyFreeper]

Nope.